Who is more likely to not turn back to crime — a convict who leaves prison no more educated than when he went in, or one who goes out armed with a college degree?

Common sense suggests it's the latter, and plenty of studies back that up. Yet there is already opposition to Gov. Andrew Cuomo's plan, announced Sunday, to offer college programs at 10 state prisons. Quipped state Sen. Martin Golden, R-Brooklyn: " 'I got my degree at Attica' — that will be the new bumper sticker slogan."

The governor's plan would give inmates a chance to earn an associate or a bachelor's degree while serving their sentences. His reasoning is persuasive: It costs about $60,000 a year to house an inmate, but just $5,000 or so more to provide one with a college education. While 40 percent of inmates end up back in prison, Bard College found that the recidivism rate among those who earn a college degree was just 4 percent.

A host of other studies found encouraging results as well. A 1997 look at North Carolina prisons found a 5 percent recidivism rate among former inmates who obtained an associate's degree, and no recidivism among those who earned four-year degrees. A 2004 analysis of studies across the country found that participation in a post-secondary program at least halved the likelihood of recidivism. The programs also fostered a better, less violent atmosphere in prisons.

More Information

Yes, it's possible that those who take advantage of these opportunities are less likely to re-offend to begin with. But throwing inmates back into society no more equipped to earn an honest living than when they went in challenges even the most well-intentioned ex-con.

Some may question why the state should do this even as public schools are struggling and state universities are raising tuition and cutting back course offerings. Others will simply see it as coddling criminals and giving them access to an education many honest people can't afford.

But this isn't about a luxury for inmates. It's about offering them the chance to better themselves, and thus emerge from incarceration with a real shot at a decent life, and not be a further burden on society. In purely economic terms, taxpayers would save if even a fraction of the once-incarcerated students stay out of trouble.

But what this idea really speaks to is the difference between punishment alone and what a correctional system should be about: rehabilitation.